The evolution of public policy as it pertains to cybersecurity is of significant interest to us at StopBadware. Our extensive experience with badware websites puts us in the position to illuminate pressing issues and possible solutions with regard to security, and we continue to focus on influencing public policy in sensible ways. Our Executive Director, Maxim Weinstein, recently submitted public comments in response to inquiries from the FCC and the U.S. Department of Commerce. StopBadware’s response to the FCC’s request for comments regarding a Cybersecurity Roadmap discusses the role of ISPs in protecting users from badware. Our comments to the U.S. Department of Commerce Internet Policy Task Force identify challenges and potential solutions to collecting and analyzing data, and influencing market change. These comments are available in full at http://www.stopbadware.org/home/research.
As always, we welcome thoughtful discussion on these topics. Policy change with regard to cybersecurity can effect widespread change that greatly increases online security; we take every opportunity to inform policymakers as to practical ways they can better protect individuals and organizations.
Fair enough, that blocks a site, whether it is malicious or has been hacked, but I see no logical that being a place that is not in English, all the documentation that determines the blocking site is in English, how easy it is to put the google translation bar.
That’s not the way to help solve the problem and isolate the bad I pirates.
(traduction by google)
Me parese bien, que se bloquee un sitio, tanto si se es malicioso como si ha sido jaqueado, pero no veo logico, que siendo un sito que no esta en ingles, toda la documentacion del portal que determina el bloqueo, esta en ingles, con lo facil que es poner la barra de traduccion de google.
Esa no es la forma de contribuir a solucionar el problema y aislar a los malos y o piratas.